Showing posts with label CONTRADICTIONS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CONTRADICTIONS. Show all posts

Monday, November 23, 2009

DIMOCK RESIDENTS SUE CABOT OIL AND GAS OVER MARCELLUS SHALE DRILLING, CONTINUED...

Of all the towns that have been subjected to drilling for natural gas in Pennsylvania since the opening up of the Marcellus Shale, none have suffered more than Dimock. In just over a year several drinking water wells have been contaminated (one of which exploded on New Years Day, ripping through an 8 foot slab of concrete), numerous spills have dumped highly toxic wastewater, diesel fuel, and fracking fluid into local streams and rivers, and residents have been exposed to dangerously high levels of methane gas and heavy metals. The series of infractions on the part of Cabot Oil and Gas, a Houston based energy company that has large holdings in Dimock, resulted in a $120,000 fine from Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) earlier this month. But the cost to residents has been far greater.

The following excerpts are from a report by Adam Federman at Earth Island Journal.
It tells of the outrageous lies and unmitigated inhumanity of practices Cabot Oil and Gas perpetrated on inhabitants and the earth at Dimock, Pennsylvania.

On Friday of last week 15 families in Dimock announced that they were suing Cabot for poisoning their water and the likelihood that exposure to toxic chemicals has led to personal injury, including neurological and gastro-intestinal complications. Among the plaintiffs is a Cabot employee and Dimock resident who has knowledge of company practices and violations that have not yet been reported. According to Leslie Lewis, an attorney with one of the firms representing the families, the charges against Cabot are far reaching and reveal a profound degree of negligence and fraudulent conduct. “To me they just seem like a rogue operation,” she says. “Anything goes.”
...
Farnelli, whose home is surrounded by gas wells, says that her children started to develop stomach problems late last summer. They would be fine at school but when they returned home at the end of the day and drank the water, the symptoms would reappear. Farnelli thought it was some kind of stomach virus and didn’t really suspect gas drilling until her neighbors told her that their water was contaminated. One day her neighbor showed her a glass of water that she says looked a bit cloudy and smelled like formaldehyde or some kind of chemical solvent. “It didn’t smell like water,” she told me.

In some cases it didn’t look like water either. Farnelli says that some residents had tap water that looked like unpasteurized apple cider with a kind of sludgy sediment on the bottom. It was a brownish orange color and had greasy bubbles on top. In 2008 Cabot drilled twenty wells in Dimock and has rapidly increased production since. They hope to drill sixty wells by the end of this year and between fifty and seventy in 2010.

There are many ways to contaminate drinking water wells. According to a Consent Order issued by the DEP in early November, Cabot failed to properly cement well casings in several instances, which can allow methane and other toxic chemicals to leak or migrate into underground aquifers and nearby drinking water wells. When that gas gets trapped in the headspaces of wells, as it did in the case of Norma Fiornetino’s drinking water well on New Years Day, it can explode. Today many residents live in fear that the same might happen to them and that their land and water has been ruined.
...
Not surprisingly, the company has continued to deny that it is responsible for the undoing of Dimock. In a prepared statement, Cabot CEO Dan O. Dinges said, “we see no merit in these claims and are disappointed that these citizens felt it necessary to proceed in this fashion.”
However, it has become increasingly difficult for the company to brush away the complaints of residents in the face of overwhelming evidence. And the whistleblower in the case will certainly test the company’s ability to defend its practices. “It's horrifying to hear him speak,” said Lewis, referring to Nolan Scott Ely, the Cabot employee who has joined the lawsuit. “It'll all come out.” ...

Farnelli says that numerous spills and infractions have gone unreported. Particularly alarming is the dumping of wastewater on roads and fields in Dimock. Throughout the summer, Farnelli says, Cabot made a point of “watering” the road that she lives on—a dirt road that has washed out several times since drilling began—to control dust even though no one was complaining about the dust. The strange thing was that it rained a lot last summer, and to Farnelli and others Cabot’s actions never really made sense. Why water the road just before it was supposed to rain?

Using tank trucks, the company would spray the road from one end to the other. Walking back from her neighbor’s one day, Farnelli noticed that the water smelled bad and seemed to have some kind of oil or detergent in it. You could see rainbows in it when the sun hit and there were large bubbles on the surface that just sat there and didn’t break. When residents complained, Cabot started using trucks that said “Fresh Water” on them.

"We think it was produced water,” Farnelli told me. “We think it was frack water." Hydraulic fracturing is a controversial technique that breaks open the shale by injecting millions of gallons of water, sand, and chemicals also known as fracking fluid deep underground to release the gas. The produced water that comes to the surface often contains naturally occurring radioactive elements and the residual chemicals used in the fracking process. Storing and treating the produced water has emerged as one of the most important issues facing Pennsylvania and New York, where horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing are relatively new. According to Farnelli Cabot also sent tank trucks into surrounding fields to empty them of wastewater. Sometimes it would take two days.

“We know that was frack water because there were people who lived around here working for them. And they were some of the ones who had to do it,” she says.

Local residents who have worked on clean up crews after Cabot’s spills have also been exposed to highly toxic chemicals. According to Lewis, on one occasion, two local workers were sent into a pit as part of a clean up crew with no protective gear. They literally burned their hands from the toxic waste.

In the meantime Cabot continues to expand its drilling operations throughout the country.
...

CLICK HERE for the complete article.
Editorializing in red by Splashdown.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Saturday, September 19, 2009

EUREKA!

Here's how the Independent Oil and Gas Association of New York Figures it Can WHAT??? Placate? Assuage? Appease? ...oh, what's the word for it??? Reassure Us or Mitigate Our Outrage After TWO Toxic Spills in Dimock PA... EUREEEEKA!
This ought to do it!
Come On People!
Talk Back to this Fantasy!!!


(Editorializing in red by Splashdown)

IOGA of NY Press Statement on Spill at Gas-Drilling Site in Dimock, PA

LAKE VIEW, NY (09/18/2009)(readMedia)-- The following press statement was issued by Brad Gill, Executive Director of the Independent Oil and Gas Association of New York (IOGA-NY) on September 18, 2009.

"On behalf of members the Independent Oil and Gas Association of New York, we are deeply concerned with the incident that occurred, in Dimock, Pennsylvania yesterday (September 17, 2009). It is our understanding that the spill resulted from a decoupling of a water line, which contained "slick water". Slick water is comprised of 99.5 percent water and sand and is not considered a toxic substance.

ahem... This is from an Aug. 7th update on the death of 17 cows in a Louisiana pasture:

"No final toxicology report has been made public about what killed 17 cows in south Caddo after they ingested liquid spilled from a nearby Chesapeake Energy Corp. drilling site April 28.

...

During a routine fracturing operation by Schlumberger, some fluids composed of 99 percent freshwater leaked onto the well pad then onto the pasture after a rain, Chesapeake Energy, which owns the well site, says in a letter sent in June to DEQ. About 4 p.m. April 28, site workers noticed the dead cattle."

We've already seen how lethal 99% water can be...

EUREKA!

Care for a glass of that water Mr. Gill?

The Pennsylvania DEP has been on hand and is satisfied with the remediation being completed.

The incident in Dimock is indeed regrettable and unfortunate. It is important to note that this circumstance should not be viewed as representative of members' work and experience day-to-day. Such incidents as the spill in Dimock are quiet rare, ...we interrupt this sentence!

(rare: adj. 1. coming or occurring far apart in time; unusual; uncommon)

EUREKA!, Cabot Oil accused of being responsible for contaminating Dimock wells.

EUREKA! Methane contamination in Colorado water wells linked to drilling.

EUREKA! House explodes in Ohio.

EUREKA! Cows die in Louisiana pasture near Chesapeake spill.

EUREKA! ...drilling has already poisoned wells in western Pennsylvania, Colorado, Alabama, Arkansas, New Mexico, Kansas, Montana, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming.

EUREKA! Water leak from Washington County gas well kills fish.

EUREKA! Not long ago the first earthquake near gas drilling sites in Texas was thought, by some, to be an anomaly. Now, 17 earthquakes later, in the space of only a few months, we cannot claim pure coincidence, nor can we ignore the dangers these earthquakes present to gas pipelines and so, to safety.

EUREKA! Contaminated water in Bradford, PA ... Water problems from drilling more frequent than PA officials said.

EUREKA! Natural gas well leak in Lycoming Co. contaminates tributaries, spring and water wells in private homes.

EUREKA! Another natural gas well leak near Roaring Branch, PA and a string of more than 50 similar cases related to gas drilling in the state.

EUREKA! Pavillion, Wyoming: EPA Confirms Drinking Water Contamination by Toxics Used in Hydraulic Fracturing.

EUREKA! Birds die after exposure to hydrocarbons in open natural gas well pits and wastewater storage facilities at ExxonMobil sites in five states.

EUREKA! 2-BE and other chemical contaminants, used in drilling, linked to series of illnesses. Pollluted water near gas-drilling sites endangering the health of people who live close to drilling rigs.

EUREKA! ...and that's just a six month Splashdown sampling...
(See more on TXsharon's Bluedaze!)

and natural gas exploration has been conducted safely and in an environmentally sound manner for decades in New York.

(Has New York had horizontal hydrofractured wells for decades? Heh. What's stopping the industry from drilling another one tomorrow?)

Our companies have worked very, very hard to work in conscientious concern for the environment – due in large measure to very rigorous oversight by NYSDEC - and we will continue to do so. We live and work in New York too.

We stand steadfast in our conviction that natural gas exploration can be facilitated in a safe and environmentally friendly manner. In days to come, IOGA of NY is looking forward to the Department of Environmental Conservation's issuance of a generic environmental impact statement that will guide Marcellus development. And as we have done in the past, our companies will comply with all regulations and permit requirements."

Well, this just flies in the face of reality. We'll take a closer look at that next.

***

IOGA of NY is a trade association founded in 1980 to protect, foster and advance the common interests of oil and gas producers, professionals and related industries in the State of New York. For additional information on natural gas exploration, as well as an up-to-date listing of the association's public meeting schedule, please visit IOGA of NY's informational blog: https://www.marcellusfacts.com.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Barnett Shale... Marcellus Shale...

Here's a post that'll give your mouse some exercise, starting with the MUST READ post by TXsharon over on Bluedaze, Barnett Shale Money Creates a Public Deaf, Dumb and Blind to Risks which links to the MUST READ article in the Fort Worth Weekly, by Don Young, Learning to Love Big Gas.

When you read these stories, and you contrast the bait with the hook, line and sinker, you have to sit up straight and pour yourself a V-8!
It occured to me, and I hope it'll to occur to more and more folks everywhere:

This is an important post, and it links to an important article because it reveals exactly how the gas industry is eroding democracy in the guise of benevolence, while really they're buying guarantees to their own corrupt brand of outlaw freedom!

What makes this information so vital is that this is not just happening in Fort Worth or in Texas. It's being repeated here in Bradford County, PA on the Marcellus shale (and no doubt in lots of other places as well). The 'benefactors' seem quite pleased (while apparently, like TXsharon says, "Deaf, Dumb and Blind to Risks"), but what they're giving away is everyone's America... or what's left of it once the drillers buy it out from under us.

For an actual example of what's being exposed here, don't miss TXsharon's next post, in which she shows us pictures of the Chesapeake display in the library. Notice especially the picture of the "Frack Pond" ... See how blue (clean) they've portrayed the water as being?
Now who doesn't know that's a lie???



DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

Clean-Energy Summit: You Want Clean Energy? Shale Gas.

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, Aug. 11, 2009

There’s another “clean energy summit” going on, this time out in Las Vegas, with all the usual suspects from Sen. Harry Reid to former vice president Al Gore hashing out ways to usher in the clean-energy revolution.

They’re still working out ways to boost renewable energy, energy efficiency, and the like, but one thing stands out from the beginning: The green patina that natural gas has suddenly assumed.

John Podesta, the head of the think tank Center for American Progress, twice cited the potential of natural gas—not just any gas, but “shale gas” extracted from underground rocks—to replace “dirty coal.”

(SPLASHDOWN RED ALERT!) Sen. Reid opened his remarks by saying, “I’ve been converted. I now belong to the Pickens church,” in reference to the plan pitched by Oklahoma oilman T. Boone Pickens to ramp up the role of natural gas (and wind power) in U.S. electricity generation. Natural gas has roughly half the carbon emissions of coal when used to generate electricity.

That echoes remarks House speaker Nancy Pelosi last year, when she referred to natural gas—which is, after all, a fossil fuel—as clean energy and an “alternative” to fossil fuels. At the time, that raised a mild firestorm. (SPLASHDOWN RED ALERT!) Now, the idea is apparently mainstream.

UPDATE, from our own Siobhan Hughes:

Energy Secretary Steven Chu continued the natural-gas lovefest, calling the Pickens plan a possible “transition” to a future filled with electric cars and biofuel-powered vehicles. Secretary Chu said that the double-whammy of electric cars and better biofuels could eventually “offload our total dependence on foreign oil.”

For more of the same CLICK HERE. Better yet, speak out! Write to Harry Reid, write to Nancy Pelosi, write to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Write to YOUR Senators and Representatives. Tell them you want BETTER SOLUTIONS NOW, including regulation of the natural gas industry to protect our air, land and water! Natural gas may have roughly half the carbon emissions of coal when used to generate electricity... but what about the carbon emissions cost of capture??? (Not to mention the other toxic, hazardous costs to public and environmental health and safety!) Ask them to investigate the real price we pay getting natural gas to market. Expose the Pickens Plan for the self serving 'solution' that it is...

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Sunday, June 21, 2009

Investigation into animal deaths re-opened... Drilling won't hurt water (!#@$&*)

There's a big dichotomy between the FACTS being exposed every day on blogs like this one and the ones listed in the sidebar, and the NONSENSE being touted by industry propagandists, which is sadly often reported in the well greased media as news.
For example, the following industry propaganda appeared in several places today, beginning, I believe, with the Schenectady, NY Daily Gazette.
The assertions are intrinsically NONSENSE, posing as FACTS. Despite ALL the reports of harm caused by hydraulic fracturing, from Colorado and Wyoming, down to Texas and Louisiana, on up into Ohio, New York and Pennsylvania, there are still professors of wisdom who imperil folks still uninformed enough to swallow this kind of hogwash whole and possibly make decisions experience will cause them to regret when it is too late.
Shame on the author for being so wreckless with the truth. And shame too on the Daily Gazette for presenting their readers, who might be expecting facts, with nonsense.

"Drilling Shale for Natural Gas Won't Hurt Water" the expert says.

My career aspirations, he begins, led me to study petroleum engineering in the 1950s. Upon graduation, I was employed by an energy company in the Southwest. It took years to develop an understanding of the problems concerning oil and gas production. Eventually, I became fairly proficient, and was involved in designing and performing fracture treatments of oil and gas reservoirs in order to increase production.

A Viewpoint column by Patricia O’Reilly Rush, on June 14, suggests that hydrofracturing of the Marcellus Shale for development of natural gas resources would endanger water supply resources.

This simply would not occur*

*UNBELIEVABLE! The arrogance of this statement flies in the face of all manner of fracking related accidents, in which contaminated water has caused illness and/or death.

Need for facts, NONSENSE VERSION!

Since very few people in the Northeast have had experience with well stimulation, he goes on, I believe your readers should have a better understanding of the facts before forming an opinion on this aspect of energy development.
...

Despite the fact that diesel fuel spent extracting natural gas is causing severe air pollution:
Natural gas burns very cleanly and we are producing about 87 percent of our needs, with the remainder coming from Canada.

We must continue to develop additional gas reserves. Therefore, the vast gas reserves locked into the “tight” Marcellus Shale must be developed. Directional drilling into this massive shale formation exposes additional length of this gas-
bearing reservoir to production and improved fracturing techniques opens up this valuable resource for decades of reliable production.

Rush’s recent Viewpoint column suggests fracture treatments of this resource will threaten water supplies, and she urges that development of this needed resource be terminated. The possibility of “frac” fluids contaminating water supplies is simply zero. I have never heard of a “frac” treatment ever adversely affecting another formation — let alone reaching the surface to pollute a stream!


For starters, Mr. Wege, you need to read the story of the toxic leak into Divide Creek, Colorado. (http://www.journeyoftheforsaken.com)


What happens after a huge injection of water into a well is a backflow of water following the treatment. The backflow may last for weeks but it will end. The chemicals that concern Rush reduce pipe friction and carry the propping agent, such as sand, that keeps the fracture open.

The chemicals that concern people who care about protecting safe drinking water and the environment from contamination are TOXIC.

Care for a glass of water, Mr. Wege?

No reason to stop

Beware the language of the argument in this next sentence!
Treatment of the backflow should be a permit condition and not a reason to condemn the effort to develop this resource. Finally, well treatments that involve the use of millions of gallons of water may be a concern to regulators and riparian interests, but can be addressed through the well permit system issued by the state Department of Environmental Conservation.
Sure, and they'll be able to manufacture the water on back order too...

(Red italic editorializing above by Splashdown)

Need for facts, NO-NONSENSE VERSION!

The most heartwrenching article I've come across recently is an update on the cows that died in their own pasture in Caddo Parish, Louisianna back on April 28th.

Investigation into animal deaths re-opened

Posted: May 19, 2009 08:53 PM

Updated: May 26, 2009 04:59 PM

KSLA News 12 Headlines

CLARIFICATION: The Department of Environmental Quality has not confirmed the cause of death of the 20 cows that shared the pasture with the Chesapeake Energy Branch 2 H-1 well site on April 28th. While the Regional Manager of the Northwest Regional Office of the DEQ has confirmed there was a chemical spill on the site, and that they have found elevated levels of potassium chloride in the soil there, no conclusion as to the exact cause of the cattle deaths has been officially determined. Test results on the cows themselves and what may have caused their deaths have not been released.

KEITHVILLE, LA (KSLA) - Neighbors of a South Caddo Parish well site insist the 20 cows that died three weeks ago after a chemical spill weren't the only victims, "Because of them letting poisons go," says Nancy Howard. Otis Randle is the Regional Manger of the Northwest Regional Office of the Department of Environmental Quality. He says elevated levels of potassium chloride were found in the soil, but DEQ investigators are waiting on final test results before revealing their official findings and who should be held responsible for the spill. Chesapeake operates the well. Schlumberger was contracted for completion services at the site. The contractor was in the process of 'fracking' the well on April 28th, when the cattle began collapsing in the pasture in which the well sits. Howard and others insist those cows weren't the only victims. "Not only cows but squirrels, birds, cats, dogs, fish," says Howard.

Randle says his office had an inspector out at the site on April 30th, the day a resident called in to report the additional animal deaths. "We found no indication, no evidence that there was ever any additional livestock or animal kills in the area." Randle says the caller was not an owner of any of the affected animals, and was not able to provide names and addresses. But he says his investigator went anyway, and canvassed the length of Keatchie-Marshall Rd. between Preston and Amy Lynn. That investigator's report shows that either there was no one home at the time, the home was gated and locked, or the resident reported no problems.

If they had turned down Amy Lynn street and around the corner to Loretta, they might have found gamecock breeder Warren Jordan. He says he lost more than 120 chicks the day those 20 cows died. "Every one of 'em, within four hours, they were all dead, the same day. I didn't even know the cows were dead."

Jordan, who until last summer raised the gamecocks for fighting, now breeds them for show. Cockfighting became illegal in Louisiana last August. But the family business passed down over 70 years is still a potentially profitable one for Jordan, which makes the loss of so many future roosters a painful one. "Out of the 120 little babies I lost, I would say probably a good 80 of them were roosters, so you're looking at about $500 times 80," Jordan explains, "I don't get no less than $500 apiece."

Jordan says he thought the chicks' deaths were connected to the arrival of a flock of blackbirds that had touched down in the yard. When the flock had gone, one dead blackbird remained. But when the chicks started keeling over, Jordan says, "I panicked! I thought, "My God,' what's goin' on here, I've never had anything like that. All I could think was just burn 'em! Keep 'em from catchin' a parasite or something like that!" And that's just what he did. A few chick-sized wishbones are all that remain in the ashes where Jordan says he piled them up and incinerated the little birds.

Back up on Keatchie-Marshall Road, down past Amy Lyn Street a short distance, Rachel Sepulvado was watching her newly acquired calf deteriorate quickly. "He kept his tongue out," remembers Rachel. "He looked pitiful, he wouldn't stand up...I have never seen a cow bleed from his eyes, only 5, 6 days old and blood out of his eyes." The young animal was also bleeding from the rectum and panting heavily, symptoms that have been described as similar to those of the ill-fated cows in the pasture shared with the Chesapeake well where the chemical spill occurred. Tammy Sepulvado says the young animal was dead in a matter of hours. "The way we're figuring how he got it is with it being in the air, because when we bought him from a friend down the road, they come right by that site with a horse trailer."

"Anything is possible, but the material that we've seen was contained to that one site," says Otis Randle with the DEQ. Randle says there was no indication on the site that the potassium chloride (a chemical compound commonly found in well completion operations) leeched any further than the topsoil, and was never airborne. "I heard 'em sayin that," responds Warren Jordan, "But yet I had 120 dead chickens!"

As a result of News 12's investigation, the DEQ has re-opened their investigation into reports of additional animal deaths.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Monday, June 8, 2009

Ghostbusting Hydraulic Fracturing... State vs. Federal Regulation (Who You Gonna Call???)


A report, by John Laurent-Tronche, in today's Fort Worth Business Press, "States or Feds: Who gets to regulate hydraulic fracturing?" states:

A recent push by federal legislators to repeal the Energy Policy Act of 2005 could mean companies that employ hydraulic fracturing, a means of stimulating and opening up a well, would have to answer to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Safe Drinking Water Act about the chemicals they use in the injection process.
...
Legislators and other concerned parties, including environmental groups, are worried the chemicals used – many of which are harmful to humans and other species – could seep into underground water tables and contaminate water supply. The industry argues there haven’t been any instances of contamination to date and federal oversight would impede natural gas and oil development by adding increased permitting requirements and economic burdens.

“We have a 60-year track record on our side,” said Chris Tucker, spokesman for Energy in Depth, a Washington, D.C.-based industry lobbying group comprised of dozens of organizations, including the Texas Alliance of Energy Producers, the Texas Independent Producers and Royalty Owners Association and the Independent Petroleum Association of America. “Why in 60 years that fracing has been used, why now? Why is everyone pissed off now?”

In today's Atomic Insights Blog post: "See No Evil, Hear No Evil Approach to Regulating Hydraulic Fracturing Shale Gas Extraction", Ron Adams counters:
...I also found out that claims of "never a problem with hydraulic fracturing" were carefully stated to ensure that the claim was applicable only to a portion of the full process and did not include the potential for human or mechanical errors during drilling through aquifers, or the potential for surface water contamination. The witnesses that claimed that there was no evidence of contamination from hydraulic fracturing admitted that some parts of the complete process of extracting gas from shale formation had historically caused some issues of contamination or property damage, but the "fracking" process itself had not yet been proven to be the cause of any incidents. (One witness dismissed the reports of previous problems by stating that they were "legacy" issues that have already been corrected through state legislation and/or regulatory changes.)

Though the natural gas industry is adamant that additional regulations will cause it undue financial burdens and limit its ability to supply the abundant, cheap fuel that it claims is a "game changer", it appears evident that the practice of drilling for unconventional gas requires consistently applied regulations set at the federal level, perhaps with some assistance from state agencies that have proven capabilities as the local enforcement arm. As described by the witness from the US Geological Survey, the formations being developed are spread over large areas that do not respect state lines. The potentially affected air and water resources also do not recognize the politically determined boundaries of existing states.

With that 60 year problem free track record in Texas, why is there suddenly such outcry?

The Fort Worth Business Press continues:

The answer, [industry spokesman Chris Tucker] said, is the Marcellus Shale. As soon as natural gas production went from an isolated area in North Texas to nationwide – in Louisiana, Wyoming, New York, Pennsylvania, Arkansas and elsewhere – people began to worry about how to address it.

“[Environmental activists] knew they couldn’t go into Texas and say that the Barnett Shale was a loser or that fracing was dangerous. They couldn’t do that in Oklahoma,” Tucker said. “But once the Marcellus Shale came out and it was clear this was huge, it all came to the forefront.”

Indeed, 34 states now have oil and gas production, said Amy Mall, senior policy analyst with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

“It definitely is a national issue,” Mall said. “It’s no longer a local issue. We think federal regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act makes sense, because it is a national issue.”

From Atomic Insights:
In many cases, notably the newly developing Marcellus shale formation, the continuous gas reservoirs are deep under the surface of states that have little existing regulatory infrastructure and little experience in deep underground drilling. It is disingenuous for the oil/gas industry and the states that have experience to dig in their heels on a states' rights basis when it is clear that the implications of developing this large and important resource in a responsible manner will require multi-state cooperation with legal enforcement of required practices and should not be dependent on voluntary compliance with vaguely defined ''best practices".

FW Business Press:
Many of the chemicals used in Texas frac jobs can cause irreparable harm to the eyes, skin, sensory organs, respiratory system, brain and nervous system, according to an April 2009 study by The Endocrine Disruption Exchange, a Colorado-based organization that studies chemicals’ effects on human health and the environment. A little more than a month ago, 19 cattle died after ingesting a fluid that originated at a Chesapeake Energy Corp. drill site in Louisiana, according to an April 29 article in the Shreveport Times. Schlumberger Ltd. reportedly was conducting a frac job at the time. The matter is under investigation by the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality.
...
There have been at least 375 cases of groundwater contamination due to oil and gas operations reported to the New Mexico Oil Conservation Division, according to a list on the government agency’s Web site. Some of the companies responsible are big players in the Barnett Shale.

From TXSharon's blog, Bluedaze today, David Burnett, Director of the Global Petroleum Research Institute, is quoted, saying:
What is the fuss about drilling a Barnett Shale well? A Barnett well site with a drilling rig operating for three months has the same impact as a city of 4,000 people - Water use, solid waste generation, air emissions and traffic. The O&G industry has been slow to realize this—that it has too big an impact on the environment. ...

Bluedaze presents us with this revealing bird's eye view of "Natural Gas Production in the Barnett Shale..."

Thank you TXSharon, for all you do.

The Fort Worth Business Press concludes:
Earlier this year, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation issued a report saying it found no significant impacts from hydraulic fracturing operations, according to news reports. Only later did the department admit it had not conducted a single test to back up that claim.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Sunday, May 17, 2009

Gas wells on DuBois' reservoir watershed?

(This Week's Contradictions)

5/16/09 Dena Bosak,
Tri-County SUNDAY Courier-Express

DuBOIS - The City of DuBois is still exploring the option of drilling gas wells at the Anderson Creek Reservoir.
In December, the city council approved a proposal with Carizzo of Houston, Texas, to drill Marcellus Shale depth gas wells on the watershed at the reservoir located in Union Township. The proposal included a title search at no cost to the city.
"We are still moving along," Mayor and acting Manager John "Herm" Suplizio said.
Suplizio said the title search has been completed and the city is starting to look at possible spots for drilling.
"We are looking forward to this venture because it will help the city out financially," he said, "but there is much more work that has to be done first."
Suplizio said there are still many state Department of Environmental Protection regulations that must be met.
"And of course, the city council's and my number one concern, now, and the whole way through this project, is the watershed," Suplizio said.
Suplizio said the city owns gas and oil rights to 2,000 acres. He said the city could lease all 2,000 acres and receive $500 per acre, which translates into $1 million.
The city could also receive 15 percent in royalties for the gas.
Regarding where the water source would come from if the drilling would take place, Suplizio said the city would be willing to sell the company the necessary water if it were asked.
"If they do it at the right time of the year, and we have the extra water," he said. "Also they have to ask us.
"They may also just decide to drill a well," he said. "They have a lot of options."
The city is still pursuing its quest for an alternate water source.
In December, the council approved a proposal with Moody and Associates of Meadville to evaluate the potential for developing a groundwater supply for the city.
Suplizio said the city has been working very hard at this. He said Steve Swope, public works superintendent; Scott Farrell, city technical engineer; Ben O'Shane of the water department and Chris Nasuti of Lee Simpson have been assisting Moody in the process.
Suplizio said the other water source will be wells. He said a possible location for the wells is near the transmission line next to the water filtration plant.
"We will keep moving forward with this project," he said. "Progress is essential to the city and the entire area to have an alternate water source, which may someday turn into our main source of water."
"The city council and myself realize how important water is now and how important clean water is in the future," Suplizio said. "This is a No. 1 priority we are looking into."

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Wednesday, May 6, 2009

Gas drillers battle Pennsylvania pollution concerns

This Week's Contradictions

Though scientists have yet to find definitive evidence that drilling chemicals have seeped into ground water, there are dozens of anecdotal reports from around the state that water supplies in gas-production areas have been tainted.

The public outcry threatens to impede exploitation of the 44-million-acre (18-million-hectare) Marcellus Shale, which geologists say might contain enough natural gas to meet U.S. demand for a decade.

People in gas-drilling areas say their well water has become discolored or foul-smelling; their pets and farm animals have died from drinking it; and their children have suffered from diarrhea and vomiting.

Bathing in well water can cause rashes and inflammation, and ponds bubble with methane that has escaped during drilling, they say. ...

Matt Pitzarella, a spokesman for Texas-based Range Resources Corp. said, "There are zero reports of chemical contamination of groundwater."

Ron Gulla, who said his land has been polluted by Range's gas drilling, was incredulous. "I have never seen such a bunch of liars in my life," he shouted at Pitzarella, to scattered applause. "You have put me through hell."

U.S. energy companies rushing to exploit Pennsylvania's massive natural gas reserves have launched a public relations campaign to calm fears the bonanza is contaminating water with toxic chemicals. Read all about it HERE.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Marcellus Water is the Worst Water on the Planet!

Severance Tax as Magic Wand
The Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center (PBPC) released a report this week advocating for a severance tax on natural resource extraction, such as the proposed tax by Governor Rendell on natural gas. The report, "Responsible Growth: Protecting the Public Interest with a Natural Gas Severance Tax," examines the potential costs of increased natural gas drilling on taxpayers and the environment, how severance taxes are structured in other states, and what lessons Pennsylvania can learn from them. According to the report, a well-structured severance tax on natural gas production will protect Pennsylvania taxpayers from shouldering the public costs that come with increased drilling.

"Natural gas extraction in the Marcellus Shale has substantial risks and substantial costs that have not yet been fully explored in the rush to drill," said Sharon Ward, Director of the non-partisan policy research center. "A severance tax is a well-tested mechanism to shift these costs back to producers, where they belong."

Natural gas drilling has an unavoidable impact on the environment, and the waste water generated during the drilling process in the Marcellus Shale poses particular concerns. According to a marketing manager at GE Water & Processes Technologies, which develops filtering technologies used to clean the water, "the Marcellus water is the worst water on the planet."

Even with adequate environmental monitoring, increased drilling in the Marcellus Shale could cause water contamination, soil erosion, disturbance to natural environments, and noise and air pollution, said Michael Wood, the Center's Research Director and lead author of the report.

Now Here Comes the Fuzzy Logic:

A severance tax is one way to ensure that taxpayers aren't asked to pay those environmental costs, the report found. It also will compensate Pennsylvanians for the removal of a non-renewable resource and offset the costs of new roads and bridges, public safety, building, and emergency response needs that accompany growth in natural gas drilling.

(Did anyone ask Pennsylvanians if they prefer a severance tax offsetting these costs to preserving the natural state of our environment in such ways as render the severance tax unnecessary?)

"What will our great grandchildren be left with when the last gas well is exhausted? A severance tax reinvested in Pennsylvania's natural resources and communities will help balance the damages caused by drilling operations and pipelines," said Andy Loza, Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Land Trust Association.

Can severance tax money generate replacement water? Can it clean the VOCs and particulate matter out of the air? Exhaust from the huge number of diesel trucks, dust from construction activity, emissions from wells that will be flared (either intentionally or accidentally), as well as the evaporation of hazardous materials in waste pits, could lead to a profound deterioration of Pennsylvania's air quality. The use and emission of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in fracking fluids could have a profound impact on all Pennsylvania's ecosystems. Predetermining remediation instead of protecting existing healthy conditions bespeaks acts complicit in their destruction.

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY!

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Chesapeake urges Towanda Township not to pass ordinance

The Daily Review today reported Brian Grove, Chesapeake Energy’s director of corporate development, urged the Towanda Township supervisors on Monday not to pass a post-and-bond ordinance to address damage to township roads from trucks traveling to drilling sites, but to instead enter into a road maintenance agreement with Chesapeake, saying the road maintenance agreement will be better for the township financially. Some sections of roadway "will get impacted in a pretty substantial way" from Chesapeake’s operations, which include the drilling, hydraulic fracturing, and pipeline work, Grove told the supervisors. CLICK HERE to read Chesapeake's arguments and persuasions.

One has to wonder why they would be arguing so fervently to spend more money than they have to...

Commenting on the Chesapeake proposal, No fan of drilling wrote:
"Chesapeake waved around their version of a road maintenance agreement at the supervisors/roadmasters get together in Rome last month. Short and shallow, is how I would describe it. We have a meaty road maintenance agreement (obtained from the very helpful Bradford County Conservation District) and presented it to Chesapeake and they told us we can't have a road maintenance agreement with them without an ordinance (which we do not yet have, but will). What is wrong with the picture? Road maintenance agreements are fine without an ordinance, as long as it is Chesapeake's version of a road maintenance agreement. They will use any excuse they can not to have to discuss, negotiate, or deal with a meaty, meaningful road maintenance agreement presented by the township.
Sounds a lot like the way they deal with the landowners around the leasing of land. They love their own lease, they hate landowner revisions.
Townships should present their own versions of road maintenance agreements to Chesapeake as the starting point for discussion/negotiation, and see how far they get. Also, compare what you have to what Chesapeake is offering you, and you will see there is a big difference in detail and quality.
I am sorry that Chesapeake feels that dealing with so many different townships is a burden in this state. I know that they would like to use standard agreements to make things easy. However, the design of our Commonwealth is what they bought into when they came here, and although they would prefer to make the townships non-entities, we are true entities of government, however small, and must be dealt with. "

Monday, March 23, 2009

Last Week's Contradictions

FOR STARTERS:
• From Fri. MAR. 13: It's All About the Water...
Industry spokesmen maintain the groundwater [in Dimock, PA] is protected by meticulous safeguards and that any chemicals used are heavily diluted and pose no health threat.
It is "impossible" that drilling has contaminated the groundwater, said Cabot spokesman Kenneth Komoroski.

• In a follow-up comment, Txsharon reports: For a frack job that uses 2 million gallons of fresh water roughly 80,000 pounds of chemicals would be used.
(How diluted is 1 lb. of toxic chemicals for every 25 gal. of water?
a. Extremely heavily diluted? b. Fairly heavily diluted? c. Slightly heavily diluted? d. None of the above.)

• From Sat. MAR. 14: Truth *and* Consequences
According a letter of violation from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. caused natural gas to infiltrate into at least nine homes in Susquehanna County. It remains unclear however, whether Cabot knowingly violated any regulations. ...
The company and DEP agree that the gas isn’t from Marcellus Shale, a pipeline leak or naturally occurring sources above ground. They also concur that the gas is likely from a gas-laden upper layer of underground Devonian shale, of which the Marcellus Shale is a component but thousands of feet deeper, Carmon said. Marcellus Shale is generally at least 5,000 feet underground, while DEP determined the gas contaminating the water wells came from a shale layer roughly between 1,500 feet and 2,000 feet deep, Carmon said.

• But then from Fri. MAR. 20: C'est la Vie...
John Hanger, acting secretary of PA's Dept. of Environmental Protection, said he could not confirm or deny reports that water in the northeast Pennsylvania township of Dimock -- where many producing wells are located -- is being contaminated by chemicals from a process called hydrofracturing, or "fracking," in which chemicals are forced deep into the rock mixed with water and sand.
On the other hand, he also said, "You can't do a large amount of drilling and have zero impact."

SO MUCH FOR CONTAMINATION, WHAT ABOUT THE GOAL OF ENERGY INDEPENDENCE?
• From Mon. MAR. 16: To Market, to Market...
With gas prices down, industry is telling us that "the US economy and security may depend on bringing these clean burning gas discoveries in the Barnett, Haynesville, Marcellus and Fayetteville Shale to market profitably."
According to Lokke Advertising, CEO, Don Lokke, Jr. "Natural gas, locally produced, is critical to energy independence and local economies. Cities and consumers need to start thinking on a local or regional basis with regard to natural gas consumption. ... In homes, gas heating, cooking, water heating, refrigerators, grills, fireplaces and even backup generators need to regain market share. Electric vs Gas price models need to be advertised. Consumers need to see gas as the clean burning alternative to coal/oil generated electric on a local basis.

• In a comment on Sat. MAR. 21, Peacegirl reported:
I have read today that, according to the CEO of Chesapeake Energy, his goal is to look to the international market to get the best price for his natural gas. He says he can get twice as much money from foreign countries and will sell there. He is looking right now for ways to transport gas overseas. Also it looks like our own natural gas will not be cheaper here in the US. We will have to pay the international going rate. So this business of becoming less dependent on foreign oil by drilling in the shale areas is bogus.

AND, WHAT ABOUT THESE OXYMORONS?
• On Wed. MAR. 18: What's Wrong with this Picture?
The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) often paints a rosy picture of the health in communities near toxic waste sites, according to a report released by the House Science Committee subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight. In the process, scientific integrity has been sacrificed. An ATSDR staffer told the subcommittee, “It seems like the goal is to disprove the communities’ concerns rather than actually trying to prove exposures.”

• From Thurs. MAR. 19: EXEMPTIONS - PARDONS...
Did you know that poisonous or toxic waste becomes "safe" (or secret, like Coke!) when our government EXEMPTS the gas industry from responsibility for the impact of their acts!
"Eleven of the 65 chemicals used by the oil and gas industry were listed as hazardous wastes when disposed of unused by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The Act, passed in 1976, was designed to protect human health and the environment from the potential hazards of waste disposal. BUT, the oil and gas industry is exempt under RCRA, which (should) protect citizens from wastes classified as hazardous." (OGAP 2007)

RURAL IMPACT VIDEOS, 6 parts

Natural gas development in Colorado, the impacts on communities, environment and public health. A primer for public servants and residents of counties that care for their lifestyles.

Drilling for Gas in Bradford County, PA ... Listen!

Cattle Drinking Drilling Waste!

EPA... FDA... Hello? How many different ways are we going to have to eat this? ... Thank you TXSharon for all you do! ... Stay tuned in at http://txsharon.blogspot.com

Landfarms

A film by Txsharon. Thank you Sharon for all you do. Click HERE to read the complete article on Bluedaze: Landfarms: Spreading Toxic Drilling Waste on Farmland

SkyTruth: Upper Green River Valley - A View From Above